Browser Network Capture Start

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing side effects. It reveals the default-all behavior and tab scope, but omits what clear does, how session scopes the recording, and that the capture remains active until browser_network_capture_stop. For a stateful tool these are significant undisclosed behaviors.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two short sentences, front-loads the core action, and uses a compact list for the filters. There is no filler and every sentence earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, but the context is incomplete for a 6-parameter stateful tool with zero annotations. Missing lifecycle/session semantics and the unexplained clear parameter mean an agent could make incorrect assumptions about capture scope and side effects. This is a material gap, not a minor one.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the input schema. It adds useful semantics for resource_types (with examples), url_contains (substring), and methods (GET/POST), but says nothing about tab, clear, or session, including the impactful clear default. The compensation is partial at best.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a concrete verb-object pair ('Start recording network requests') and scopes it to 'this tab', which distinguishes it from siblings like browser_network_capture_stop, browser_network_list, and browser_network_get. It does not just restate the tool name.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives invocation context: optional filters and the default 'records everything', so an agent knows the capture starts unfiltered if filters are omitted. However, it never states when to choose this over sibling network tools (get/list/block/unblock) or how it fits into the capture lifecycle, leaving that to inference.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.